MAJOR RADHA KRISHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The appellant was a permanent Commissioned Officer of the Indian Army holding the substantive rank of Major. While he was posted at the Military Farm in Jullunder City he was served with a notice dated September 10, 1990 issued under the directions and on behalf of the Chief of the Army Staff calling upon him to show cause why his service should not be terminated under Section 19 of the Army Act, 1950 ('Act' for short) read with Rule 14 of the Army Rules, 1954 ('Rules' for short) for the misconducts he was found to have committed during his tenure as the Officer in charge of the Military Farm, Jaipur. The misconducts are set out in paragraph 3 of the notice but as they are not germane for the purpose of this appeal, it is not necessary to detail them. The reasons which prompted the Chief of the Army Staff to take recourse to the above provisions of the Act and the Rules are contained in paragraph 4 of the notice, which reads as under:

(3.) In the due course the appellant showed cause against his proposed termination of services but it did not find favour with the authorities. Hence, on their recommendation, the Central Government issued an order on February 28, 1992 terminating the service of the appellant. Aggrieved thereby the appellant filed a writ petition before a learned Judge of the Rajasthan High Court. In assailing the order of termination the principal ground that was raised by the appellant was that the provisions of Section 19 of the Act and Rule 14 of the Rules could not be invoked as the period of limitation prescribed under Section 122 of the Act for holding his trial by a Court Martial was long over. Besides, it is contended that the satisfaction of the authorities that it was impracticable to hold the trial was not obtained in accordance with Rule 14. The appellant also denied that he was guilty of the misconducts alleged in the notice and gave out his defence against the same.